i realize i might be stirring up some big emotional debate on here.. but hey, that's what blogging is for. to get people talking. although NO ONE talks on my freaking blog anymore.. it's all comments on facebook, and emails, and texts... COMMENT HERE DAMMIT. great discussions happen in the comments section of blogs people. you can comment anonymously, with a name, or whatever.. just do what i tell you. ha :)
okay... so my friend kristina just posted on her book of faces about how disappointed she was in the education system and how "new, great, loves kids and teaching more than anything teachers got laid off while other tenured, not-so-great, couldn't care less about the kids, teachers still hold their job."
and before i knew it.. i was on kind of a rant. i started thinking about how flawed that system is. which quickly led to more thinking (never a good thing) about how the hell tenure started in the first place? how did we, as a society, get to a point where people were GUARANTEED they could not be fired from their jobs (without something major happening), regardless of how shitty they are at them? i mean, what other jobs do this? i'm honestly asking, cause i don't know. is it a union thing?
so then i commented on her post with the following:
"i feel like it's a super flawed system.. i mean, who else gets to keep their jobs no matter how much they suck at them, how much they hate them, how passed the times they are, how out of touch with today's youth they are, how mean, how ineffective... or simply based on seniority?"
and i mean.. this is teaching for pete's sake. a job where you should care.. i mean, really care about what it is you're doing. you should want to be there. you should love what you do (although we all hate parts of what we do, and i would assume that teaching is no different.. i'm sure i'd want to kill most parents, and all the shitty kids at some point) and i'm not saying that just because someone is older they should get the ax and be fired. god, i don't think that about any job. no one should be replaced because of their age.... but when effectiveness (and INeffectiveness) comes into play, that's when there's a problem.
so why is teaching different?
why is it that once your tenured, you're almost completely protected? until what? you die? or retire? i mean... if you're a teacher and you read my blog, tell me what you think IS affective about tenure.. what isn't? do you think it's a good thing? and not just because it protects the hell out of your job. do you think it's a flawed idea.. one that's out of date?
i guess mostly, i feel like tenure guarantees that crappy teachers can keep their jobs, while great ones can't.
but i'm not a teacher. i'm not in the educational system, so the truth is... that i don't know if that's even what tenure actually means or not?!?! so if i'm wrong, PLEASE tell me. i'm fully capable of admitting my wrongness (it is so rare- ha).
talk to me people.